AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-09-24, 12:56   Link #2021
autobachs
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Look, Historically science and religion have been in competition for the truth, rivals for what is finally and ultimately true. But if this has been historically the way science and religion have related, it does not necessarily have to be that way! They could be viewed as complimentary, needing each other in order to come to the full truth.

In fact, The Center for Theology and Science at University of California Berkeley has as its mission to find the complimentary relationship between science and religion!
autobachs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 13:00   Link #2022
Let'sFightingLove
So right I'm left
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by autobachs View Post
Look, Historically science and religion have been in competition for the truth, rivals for what is finally and ultimately true. But if this has been historically the way science and religion have related, it does not necessarily have to be that way! They could be viewed as complimentary, needing each other in order to come to the full truth.

In fact, The Center for Theology and Science at University of California Berkeley has as its mission to find the complimentary relationship between science and religion!
Science does not compliment religion, it seeks to eradicate it.

Presently, we simply lack the means to ascertain the truth, that's all there is to it.
Let'sFightingLove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 13:01   Link #2023
Cipher
.....
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Let'sFightingLove View Post
Science does not compliment religion, it seeks to eradicate it.

Presently, we simply lack the means to ascertain the truth, that's all there is to it.
Religion is a science.
Cipher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 13:02   Link #2024
roriconfan
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Thessaloniki - Greece
Send a message via MSN to roriconfan
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeedFreedom View Post
So let me ask you this. According to your belief, everything happens for a reason correct? So my not believing in a god is also for a reason. If god is really all powerful or has some sort of master plan then there is no point in me going against his will and i should remain an atheist as it was how i was raised. If for his plan i needed to believe in him it would be very simple. For me to believe in god i simply need to see a miracle that can't be explained by science. Something that brakes every rule. Since he has not done so, even when the amount of people who consider themselves religious is on a decrease, it means having a faith isn't that important to his plan.
Indeed your faith is not important. Yet, you always get a bonus if you go along with the bigshots.
roriconfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 13:07   Link #2025
Let'sFightingLove
So right I'm left
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
Religion is a science.
It's a pseudo-science undeserving of mention.
Let'sFightingLove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 13:07   Link #2026
autobachs
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Let'sFightingLove View Post
Science does not compliment religion, it seeks to eradicate it.

Presently, we simply lack the means to ascertain the truth, that's all there is to it.
Your too focused on current Abrahamic religions. No doubt that they are 2 billion people strong!
autobachs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 13:09   Link #2027
autobachs
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
Religion is a science.
Look, Another we might view science and religion is that of having different areas of jurisdiction: Science is about the physical universe and religion is about a spiritual realm; science and religion are talking about different things. If philosophy, science and religion are all in some sense about the truth, and philosophy’s means to it is reason and science’s means to it is observations and experimentation, then what is religion’s means to the truth? This is not an easy question to answer, and one of the reasons for this is because there is not just one religion, there are MANY! We cannot assume that all religions come to the truth in the same way, whatever way that may be, nor can we assume that they come to the same truth.
autobachs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 13:09   Link #2028
roriconfan
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Thessaloniki - Greece
Send a message via MSN to roriconfan
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeedFreedom View Post
Then can i ask why god would allow so many people to die all in his name. If i am correct, Judaism, Christianity, and Islamic faiths all share the same god, but with different saviors (or none yet for the Jewish)(please don't be offended if i am wrong). Yet these three are fighting constantly. Why does god not end the bloodshed by defining one as correct? God is generous enough to give us freedom, but not to save those led astray by false prophets? He creates temptation, but gives us little to help resist it. He creates a savior, but only has it appear in a small region of this large world. As i said if believing in god is so important, why does he not give me a miracle so i can believe him, knowing this is the only thing that would convince me? Either god doesn't want me to be religious, or he is toying with me and purposely doesn't allow me to be saved, or he doesnt exist. Either way i see no point in worshiping him if that is true.
Actually, you are seeing things from a non-religious angle. For those who believe, life itself is provided by God. They are alive because God created them. This is all the miracle someone who believes needs. Taking things for granted is not really an answer as most of humanity lacks essential needs that the civilized world wastes in luxury exactly because it takes them for granted. For example, I didn't know for several years that many types of plants and animals are not that plump and big in wildlife. They were made as such after thousands of hybrid improvements. Yet I always thought they were big everywhere. If polution keeps rising, in a few decades the very air all generations so far took for granted will no longer be seen mundane. And so on. Faith is like that. The believer gives a lot of importance to things most people find unimportant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kusa-San View Post
Anyway, What do you think of sect ? Am I the only one who think that our actual religion were, at the begining, sect and then evolved into religion ?
Sure, all new religions begin as sects. The only difference amongst the two is the number of believers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeedFreedom View Post
If god isn't going to save me, why does he give me temptation and weakness and doubt if he knows i can't fight it without a strong sign? Freedom is not worth damnation if he gives me freedom to choose the wrong path and does nothing to help me onto the right one. Of course to clarify i am only speaking about the "You must believe in god and no other" rule he has. If i have harmed others or have been a general "bad" person all my life i don't expect him to save me, religious or not.
See, you did it again. You keep taking things for granted. God gives you a gun. You are free to use this gun any way you like. If you blow your brains out, it's your fault. If you use the gun to hunt and gather meat from animals, it's your gain. Salvation is saving yourself from yourself.
roriconfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 13:20   Link #2029
monster
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
What i'm curious of is your reasoning; regardless of whether or not there is a god, what the shit does he do for you here and now?
No one can answer that question by disregarding God's existence. And since I believe God exists, the answer would be that he created me along with the entire universe and the physical rules that affect it, a subset of which is described in science books. He also gave me the ability to choose whether to follow him and the grace to forgive my sins should I choose to accept him as my personal savior as well as hope for life everlasting after my present life has ended. In the mean time, I pray for his guidance and protection while believing that he listens to my prayers and grants that which is in his will.
Quote:
Don't intertwine your petty beliefs with the reality of this life, you're not doing anyone on this planet a favor by giving praise to poorly fabricated falsehoods.
My belief is part of this life's reality, your rejection of it does not make it any less so. And my giving thanks is not intended for anybody in this world but the one to whom I give thanks. Plus, it does not harm anyone either.
Quote:
Be an asset to society, become proactive positively(ie. scientifically or something along those lines that matter), lead your life liberated from the constraints of some 3rd party supernatural force and worry about 'god' when you're dead.
Having faith in God would not prevent anyone from being an asset to society. I don't know why you would think otherwise.

Last edited by White Manju Bun; 2009-09-24 at 15:37.
monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 13:25   Link #2030
Narona
Emotionless White Face
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Let'sFightingLove View Post
Don't intertwine your petty beliefs with the reality of this life, you're not doing anyone on this planet a favor by giving praise to poorly fabricated falsehoods.

Be an asset to society, become proactive positively(ie. scientifically or something along those lines that matter), lead your life liberated from the constraints of some 3rd party supernatural force and worry about 'god' when you're dead.
So you think every atheist, whatever they do on this planet, do better things for society than any religious people?

So, explain to me why i know many atheist that are just parasites, while I know some religious people who contribute well to the society whatever their beliefs that they don't expose all the time (at least here, you can see people acting kindly without exposing their beliefs. I think it might be different in the US, since so many people claimed that in the US, religious are all the time on the street trying to convert people. Well, it's not like that here)?

You can be a religious who don't serve the society well, and it's also true for atheists.
Narona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-24, 15:50   Link #2031
White Manju Bun
What would you know!
*Author
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Shibuya Psychic Research
Ok let's all have a refresher course of what's acceptable in the forum...

1.2 Do not insult or harass other members
Insults, harassment, flaming, trolling, baiting or other similar abusive behaviour towards other members of The Forum will not be tolerated. This includes the use of "retort images". Images used to convey a "come back" message (i.e. to "retort") are forbidden in all areas of The Forum, they are often offensive and only serve to ignite flame wars.

2.8 Avoid flammable and cyclic topics
Please be aware that political and religious discussions often cause very heated debates with little give or take on either side. They normally start out interesting and sensible but degrade rapidly. This produces the same arguments repeatedly for pages and induces many members to start "flaming" each other. Such topics will most likely be closed unless care is taken to keep the thread both interesting and polite. Similar discussions, concerning the illegality of fansubs and licensing debates, may also be treated in this way.

I believe this thread hit that mark today which is why it was closed while the cleaning crew went through it. For now the thread will remain closed, I'll probably open it sometime tomorrow. If when reopened the rules can't be followed the thread might be closed for longer/forever.
__________________
Break - Pandora HeartsManju's Stuff
"I will always remember
when the Doctor was me."
- 11th Doctor.

Many thanks to kaigan
for the sig.
White Manju Bun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-25, 18:20   Link #2032
Edgewalker
Nani ?
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Emerald Forest ( yes its a real place. )
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reckoner View Post
I'm curious how would many people act if God's morality was swapped. He desired for humans to do evil things in the world. Would people still follow him, or would they end up defying him?
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost...&postcount=331

=====================================
For those too lazy to click the link.
=====================================

Here is an interesting thing to ponder when questioning whether or not religious people who believe in an absolute being that dictates right from wrong have a better grasp on ethics then those who do not believe...

The entire premise that to be ethical requires an absolute being rests on the idea that the answer to the euthyphro dilemma is that it is "right because God says so". This makes God an objective being- meaning that all he says is 100% truth and reality. If God were to say leprechauns exist, they would. In comparison, we are subjective beings. Reality is not bended to our will. If we believe that we see a leprechaun during an acid trip, it does not mean that leprechauns exist. It just means they exist in our mind. Our thoughts and opinions on reality are subjective and thus open to question.

To put it in simpler terms, think of God ( Objective ) as a game programmer and us ( Subjective ) as characters in his game ( Reality ). The programmer dictates reality and we have no choice but to go with it.

The thing about being a subjective being is that pretty much everything we experiance or think is subjective. For all we know, everything we hear, breath, touch, and know is an illusion via a system similar to "the matrix". We can "know" things for 99.9999 % but we can never reach 100%. Every piece of knowledge we come accross must first be comprehended by our subjective minds. Which explains why we humans have different opinions on what things mean - different ideals mean different things to two different subjective minds that have experienced reality through other perspectives. Ironically, this is why we even have different religions in the first place.

Now lets take it up a notch and look at the relationship between a subjective being and an objective being. If one of us was to talk to God and God was to tell us the meaning of life, would he then have objective knowledge regarding life's purpose ? Actually, he wouldn't. In order to understand the objective knowledge that is being transferred, the subjective being in question would go through a number of subjective walls.

First: acknowledge that they are talking to an objective being ( God ) - Subjective. How does the person know they are talking to God and not their own hallucination ? Even if He really was talking to God, it doesn't change the fact that his understanding of the situation is still subjective.

Second: Acknowledge and comprehend the wisdom that has been given to you by the objective being. Wake up ! You just got told the meaning of life. So now what do you do ? Simple, the first thing the subjective being would do is attempt to figure out what he has been told actually means to him. whether this is done subconsciously or consciously doesn't matter, if the subjective being has any hope of remembering what he has been told, he goes through this step.

This creates a problem: No matter what, a subjective being cannot gain access to objective wisdom even if it is told directly to you by the almighty one himself, because Just by comprehending what it is you have been told through a subjective mind, the objective wisdom you have gained becomes subjective to your own understanding and thus becomes subjective in the process. Its the same as pouring water into orange juice, no matter how much watter is poured in their will still be some orange juice inside. its that barrier between 99.999999999999999% and 100% that we as subjective beings, by definition cannot ever cross.


In other words, even if an absolute objective being exists that dictates the reality behind ethics...as far as we are concerned and as far as we can comprehend, it doesn't matter. As subjective being's we will always find ourselves turning to our own reason at one time or another, because thats what we ultimately understand. Even if God were to give us Objective knowledge of morality we would still only be able to comprehend that objective knowledge through a subjective mind. Our ethical standards would still be subjective.

If God was to tell us that murder is in fact, morally good, how many of us would honestly just flat out stop thinking about what we feel is right or wrong and go kill everyone we know and love ? Except for the few extremely brainwashed individuals, most of us would try to protect our families from the inevitable onslaught to come. Personally, I would give God the finger. But thats just me.

In conclusion: absolute "Universal Laws" dictating what is right and wrong are as far as we're concerned, nonexistent.

Just my 2 cents.




EDIT NOTE: I am not posting this in an attempt to stir up flamewars. I'm simply posting my personal view of objective vs subjective morality. Take it to mean as you will. There is obviously nothing to stop anyone from flaming me for it, but just be aware that I will ignore any response to this post that I feel would result in this thread getting locked if it was taken seriously. Of course, for those who have something constructive and non flammatory to say, I'm all ears.
Edgewalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-25, 21:05   Link #2033
Cipher
.....
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edgewalker View Post
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost...&postcount=331

=====================================
For those too lazy to click the link.
=====================================

Here is an interesting thing to ponder when questioning whether or not religious people who believe in an absolute being that dictates right from wrong have a better grasp on ethics then those who do not believe...

The entire premise that to be ethical requires an absolute being rests on the idea that the answer to the euthyphro dilemma is that it is "right because God says so". This makes God an objective being- meaning that all he says is 100% truth and reality. If God were to say leprechauns exist, they would. In comparison, we are subjective beings. Reality is not bended to our will. If we believe that we see a leprechaun during an acid trip, it does not mean that leprechauns exist. It just means they exist in our mind. Our thoughts and opinions on reality are subjective and thus open to question.

To put it in simpler terms, think of God ( Objective ) as a game programmer and us ( Subjective ) as characters in his game ( Reality ). The programmer dictates reality and we have no choice but to go with it.

The thing about being a subjective being is that pretty much everything we experiance or think is subjective. For all we know, everything we hear, breath, touch, and know is an illusion via a system similar to "the matrix". We can "know" things for 99.9999 % but we can never reach 100%. Every piece of knowledge we come accross must first be comprehended by our subjective minds. Which explains why we humans have different opinions on what things mean - different ideals mean different things to two different subjective minds that have experienced reality through other perspectives. Ironically, this is why we even have different religions in the first place.

Now lets take it up a notch and look at the relationship between a subjective being and an objective being. If one of us was to talk to God and God was to tell us the meaning of life, would he then have objective knowledge regarding life's purpose ? Actually, he wouldn't. In order to understand the objective knowledge that is being transferred, the subjective being in question would go through a number of subjective walls.

First: acknowledge that they are talking to an objective being ( God ) - Subjective. How does the person know they are talking to God and not their own hallucination ? Even if He really was talking to God, it doesn't change the fact that his understanding of the situation is still subjective.

Second: Acknowledge and comprehend the wisdom that has been given to you by the objective being. Wake up ! You just got told the meaning of life. So now what do you do ? Simple, the first thing the subjective being would do is attempt to figure out what he has been told actually means to him. whether this is done subconsciously or consciously doesn't matter, if the subjective being has any hope of remembering what he has been told, he goes through this step.

This creates a problem: No matter what, a subjective being cannot gain access to objective wisdom even if it is told directly to you by the almighty one himself, because Just by comprehending what it is you have been told through a subjective mind, the objective wisdom you have gained becomes subjective to your own understanding and thus becomes subjective in the process. Its the same as pouring water into orange juice, no matter how much watter is poured in their will still be some orange juice inside. its that barrier between 99.999999999999999% and 100% that we as subjective beings, by definition cannot ever cross.


In other words, even if an absolute objective being exists that dictates the reality behind ethics...as far as we are concerned and as far as we can comprehend, it doesn't matter. As subjective being's we will always find ourselves turning to our own reason at one time or another, because thats what we ultimately understand. Even if God were to give us Objective knowledge of morality we would still only be able to comprehend that objective knowledge through a subjective mind. Our ethical standards would still be subjective.

If God was to tell us that murder is in fact, morally good, how many of us would honestly just flat out stop thinking about what we feel is right or wrong and go kill everyone we know and love ? Except for the few extremely brainwashed individuals, most of us would try to protect our families from the inevitable onslaught to come. Personally, I would give God the finger. But thats just me.

In conclusion: absolute "Universal Laws" dictating what is right and wrong are as far as we're concerned, nonexistent.

Just my 2 cents.




EDIT NOTE: I am not posting this in an attempt to stir up flamewars. I'm simply posting my personal view of objective vs subjective morality. Take it to mean as you will. There is obviously nothing to stop anyone from flaming me for it, but just be aware that I will ignore any response to this post that I feel would result in this thread getting locked if it was taken seriously. Of course, for those who have something constructive and non flammatory to say, I'm all ears.
Thank you for clarifying that for everyone. I understand subjectivity in this and all but...Don't you believe that humans are naturally/originally "good"---using the majority definition of good of course---and that, *that* "gene" exists within every human? Do you believe that some people are, by nature, inherently "evil"?

To me, as far as history goes, by majority, it's pretty clear that humans do have that *good* tendency to actually strive for organization, peace and harmony, as oppose to destruction, chaos and complete violence. (This might not be a very strong point considering how there were world wars.)

....And for my explanation for the *evil* minority: they're either affected by some heavy emotional nurture issues or are/were not mentally/properly "human" anymore----psychological defects.
Cipher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-25, 21:30   Link #2034
SeedFreedom
Hina is my goddess
*Graphic Designer
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstert View Post
You said earlier that you'd need to see a miracle before you can believe in God. Then you said since God refused to show such a miracle, then faith must not be important to his plan. What I'm trying to say is that faith becomes more important when there is no miracle to be seen. Since without a miracle, there is only faith that can make you believe in God.

In other words, if you see neither God himself nor other undeniable proof of God's existence (such as an unexplainable miracle in your case), yet you are still certain of his existence, that is only possible through faith. And that's why faith becomes more important, rather than less, by God choosing not to show a miracle.
But that's under the assumption i need to believe in god, hence i need faith. If you must label what created this universe, god might be a fitting title, but i don't believe it is some omnipotent being worthy or desiring praise. More likely it is some mass of energy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by roriconfan View Post
Actually, you are seeing things from a non-religious angle. For those who believe, life itself is provided by God. They are alive because God created them. This is all the miracle someone who believes needs. Taking things for granted is not really an answer as most of humanity lacks essential needs that the civilized world wastes in luxury exactly because it takes them for granted. For example, I didn't know for several years that many types of plants and animals are not that plump and big in wildlife. They were made as such after thousands of hybrid improvements. Yet I always thought they were big everywhere. If polution keeps rising, in a few decades the very air all generations so far took for granted will no longer be seen mundane. And so on. Faith is like that. The believer gives a lot of importance to things most people find unimportant.

Sure, all new religions begin as sects. The only difference amongst the two is the number of believers.

See, you did it again. You keep taking things for granted. God gives you a gun. You are free to use this gun any way you like. If you blow your brains out, it's your fault. If you use the gun to hunt and gather meat from animals, it's your gain. Salvation is saving yourself from yourself.
Ok, so by that logic, if i hand a monkey a gun, and it uses it and accidentally shoots another monkey without knowing how to use it, then i punish it by restricting its food would that be fair? yes the gun could help the monkey. But it had no comprehension of how it works. Lets say further this monkey saw someone use the gun to shoot someone else and steal their food, thereby thinking this is how a gun should be used, and is then punished for shooting another monkey. Is that different than being tempted by another to sin or led astray without the proper tools to fight it?

Ignoring all of that, if god gives me a tool,say free will, and doesn't help me use it properly, say by allowing me to give into temptation or be fooled by a false prophet, and punishes me when i had no chance to do the right thing, then why should i praise him and follow a religion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
Thank you for clarifying that for everyone. I understand subjectivity in this and all but...Don't you believe that humans are naturally/originally "good"---using the majority definition of good of course---and that, *that* "gene" exists within every human? Do you believe that some people are, by nature, inherently "evil"?

To me, as far as history goes, by majority, it's pretty clear that humans do have that *good* tendency to actually strive for organization, peace and harmony, as oppose to destruction, chaos and complete violence. (This might not be a very strong point considering how there were world wars.)

....And for my explanation for the *evil* minority: they're either affected by some heavy emotional nurture issues or are/were not mentally/properly "human" anymore----psychological defects.
I know this wasn't directed to me, but i want to respond.
I don't believe people are either born good or evil, only someone sees a mutual benefit in helping each other and hence "good" was formed. Otherwise people are motivated by greed. Either greed for acceptance, praise, or material goods.
__________________
Goodbye AnimeSuki
You have lost your once great spirit
SeedFreedom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-25, 21:48   Link #2035
Cipher
.....
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeedFreedom View Post
But that's under the assumption i need to believe in god, hence i need faith. If you must label what created this universe, god might be a fitting title, but i don't believe it is some omnipotent being worthy or desiring praise. More likely it is some mass of energy.
Pardon me, but there are no reassurances that it is *most likely* just *some* mass of energy.

Quote:
Ok, so by that logic, if i hand a monkey a gun, and it uses it and accidentally shoots another monkey without knowing how to use it, then i punish it by restricting its food would that be fair? yes the gun could help the monkey. But it had no comprehension of how it works. Lets say further this monkey saw someone use the gun to shoot someone else and steal their food, thereby thinking this is how a gun should be used, and is then punished for shooting another monkey. Is that different than being tempted by another to sin or led astray without the proper tools to fight it?
You have a good point. And who's the supreme being that dictates whether its a sin or not?
Quote:
Ignoring all of that, if god gives me a tool,say free will, and doesn't help me use it properly, say by allowing me to give into temptation or be fooled by a false prophet, and punishes me when i had no chance to do the right thing, then why should i praise him and follow a religion?
Its your sin, its your fault. Are you so dependent on God that you have to rely on him for decisions? Like I've continuously said, He's not there to *save* you.

Quote:
I know this wasn't directed to me, but i want to respond.
I don't believe people are either born good or evil, only someone sees a mutual benefit in helping each other and hence "good" was formed. Otherwise people are motivated by greed. Either greed for acceptance, praise, or material goods.
Thanks for responding----there's no wrong in butting in.

So people see the *benefit* and acts because it? And, after years pass, this forms the societal pressure that creates *conscience*? Good point.

Though I think its *deeper* than mere *benefits*. Just like how its natural for Moms to protect and love their children, Its natural to, in different levels, help others----instinctively(biological reason of life) perhaps, but I'm saying *good* is instinctive as well. My sentences might be too confusing (in fact, it is (a bit) to me, ), so if you want clearance, please don't hesitate.
Cipher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-25, 22:23   Link #2036
Reckoner
Bittersweet Distractor
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cipher View Post

Though I think its *deeper* than mere *benefits*. Just like how its natural for Moms to protect and love their children, Its natural to, in different levels, help others----instinctively(biological reason of life) perhaps, but I'm saying *good* is instinctive as well. My sentences might be too confusing (in fact, it is (a bit) to me, ), so if you want clearance, please don't hesitate.
Perhaps you can think of it in such a manner. However, mothers protecting their young serves another purpose than the idealized altruism perpetrated in society, biologically speaking. It is the preservation of one's DNA in the gene pool. Parents are there to make sure their line of being continues on.

There is no such thing as true altruism in my eyes. All supposed good actions usually benefit the person in question (And all it can be in the end is self-gratification and fulfillment ala Mother Teresa types).

Obviously morality is made by a society. The most typical types of moral values stem from Judo-Christian religions (In Asia I don't know. Perhaps Buddhism, Confucianism, Shintaoism and all that jazz).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edgewalker View Post
Spoiler for For room:
Well you just elaborated on something I wanted people to think about, didn't realize someone already made an elaborate post on this idea, though this thread has existed for quite a long time.

Good post.
Reckoner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-25, 22:30   Link #2037
Cipher
.....
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reckoner View Post
Perhaps you can think of it in such a manner. However, mothers protecting their young serves another purpose than the idealized altruism perpetrated in society, biologically speaking. It is the preservation of one's DNA in the gene pool. Parents are there to make sure their line of being continues on.
I still believe that Mother's love for their children has some connections towards *selfish* altruism. My baby brother, w/o even proper societal knowledge(not sure about this), shared food to another toddler.
Quote:
There is no such thing as true altruism in my eyes. All supposed good actions usually benefit the person in question (And all it can be in the end is self-gratification and fulfillment ala Mother Teresa types).
Of course, but lets just call it a *good* self-interest that, in my opinion, originally exists within humans.

Quote:
Obviously morality is made by a society. The most typical types of moral values stem from Judo-Christian religions (In Asia I don't know. Perhaps Buddhism, Confucianism, Shintaoism and all that jazz).
But, before society makes(*develops* is the better word, IMO) morality, what makes society? Humans, is it not?
Cipher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-25, 22:33   Link #2038
SeedFreedom
Hina is my goddess
*Graphic Designer
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
Pardon me, but there are no reassurances that it is *most likely* just *some* mass of energy.
Sorry, let me clarify. I believe it is most likely just some mass of energy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
You have a good point. And who's the supreme being that dictates whether its a sin or not?

Its your sin, its your fault. Are you so dependent on God that you have to rely on him for decisions? Like I've continuously said, He's not there to *save* you.
What i am trying to say is, god or religion defines something as "wrong" and expects us to be able to resist or face consequences if we don't. But some are led by "false prophets" or have never learned the truth(i.e. never had contact with anyone from the right religion), so how can we expect them to follow? If god doesn't give me the right tools to see the truth, why should i be punished for it? Some religions state those who believe in false prophets will never reach heaven, no matter how good a person they were.

I am not trying to say religion is bad or anything like that. Just as a person growing up in a non-religious house and learning science at a young age makes it hard to believe in a religion or a god who just goes against all laws of nature. I want to see how people deal with all the contradictions that i see in religion.
__________________
Goodbye AnimeSuki
You have lost your once great spirit
SeedFreedom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-25, 22:37   Link #2039
Reckoner
Bittersweet Distractor
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
I still believe that Mother's love for their children has some connections towards *selfish* altruism. My baby brother, w/o even proper societal knowledge(not sure about this), shared food to another toddler.

Of course, but lets just call it a *good* self-interest that, in my opinion, originally exists within humans.


But, before society makes(*develops* is the better word, IMO) morality, what makes society? Humans, is it not?
Your baby brother could just possess an interest in the other toddler and is trying to show friendliness in the hopes that he shows friendliness back?

Societies come together because they want to protect themselves. I don't want the caveman 10 feet away to come into my cave, bop me on the head, and take my mate.
Reckoner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-25, 22:43   Link #2040
Cipher
.....
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeedFreedom View Post
What i am trying to say is, god or religion defines something as "wrong" and expects us to be able to resist or face consequences if we don't. But some are led by "false prophets" or have never learned the truth(i.e. never had contact with anyone from the right religion), so how can we expect them to follow? If god doesn't give me the right tools to see the truth, why should i be punished for it?
But you do have the tools. This is actually why we're discussing "humans having original 'goodness'".


Quote:
Some religions state those who believe in false prophets will never reach heaven, no matter how good a person they were.

I am not trying to say religion is bad or anything like that. Just as a person growing up in a non-religious house and learning science at a young age makes it hard to believe in a religion or a god who just goes against all laws of nature. I want to see how people deal with all the contradictions that i see in religion.
In regards to my one and only religion that is Islam, the contradictions you see are merely the result of misinterpretation. It is the individual and not the religion itself, you see. Furthermore, there are more "good" Muslims than "bad" ones---its just that stereotypes have *that* much power.

On the case of how it goes against all laws of nature, there really is no *definite* "laws" of nature. Its just a system created by science for simplifying reasons for others to understand better and faster---which are...in my opinion, actions that are understandable.

My suggestion is to think more *intuitively*, or dwell on the outside of the "boxes"----"boxes" that are science and other practical or "real" issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reckoner View Post
Your baby brother could just possess an interest in the other toddler and is trying to show friendliness in the hopes that he shows friendliness back?
Perhaps...but It could also be what I'm suggesting.

Quote:
Societies come together because they want to protect themselves. I don't want the caveman 10 feet away to come into my cave, bop me on the head, and take my mate.
It's *logical* and *intellectual*, I understand that. But what about the *families* that come together, not for *safety*, but for *affection*?

Yes, you could also take that *affection* as a logical way of removing social depression---an *also* necessity towards survivability. But you can't remove that *innate tendency* of man to be "good".

Last edited by Cipher; 2009-09-25 at 22:56.
Cipher is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
not a debate, philosophy, religion

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:11.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.